Conversation
lgfa29
approved these changes
Feb 13, 2026
sudomateo
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2026
Collaborator
sudomateo
left a comment
sudomateo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This works for me! We'll likely find a better home for these methods in the future but for now this is clear.
For parity with oxide.rs, expose experimental methods from the api, prefixing paths with "Experimental" to indicate to users that the methods may change.
sudomateo
force-pushed
the
jmcarp/expose-experimental
branch
from
a8770b3 to
0f685d6
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
For parity with oxide.rs, expose experimental methods from the api, prefixing paths with "Experimental" to indicate to users that the methods may change.
Note: we could also indicate methods as being experimental by putting them into a different package, or a different client, or just in their docs. This seemed like the simplest approach that would still make the intention clear to sdk users.